how much do you think it would cost to set up a video camera system aimed at America's skies so that it covered every inch of sky? if we spread cameras out at appropriate intervals...say every 10 miles...maybe more....yeah there would be alot of cameras but we would have a recording of our night skies......as the sightings pour in and i mean pour in they happen every day and night all over america....we could go to the appropriate tape and take a look. simple but effective don't you think?

Just say the word, and I will be there with bells on. I have the camera and
tripod ready to set up at a moments notice. I can cover a lot of area out here
in Western Nebraska, as it is flat and level and usually a lot of sky to watch.
Count me in.........

Robert L. Sharp

Gering, Nebraska USA

Don Tago1/1/2004 6:29:21 PM

Why do something stupid like that when we have radar....We can see everything flying in the sky that way. But then you will say.."They can block themselves from radar because they want to hide from detection." Well if they are trying to avoid detection, why are they 1. flying so low when they could simply orbit and be undetected. or 2. flying with all these flashing bright glowing lights on, where they can be seen by every Tom, Dick and Harry.

Thank you

1/1/2004 6:35:51 PM

Why do something stupid like that when we have radar....We can see everything flying in the sky that way. But then you will say.."They can block themselves from radar because they want to hide from detection." Well if they are trying to avoid detection, why are they 1. flying so low when they could simply orbit and be undetected. or 2. flying with all these flashing bright glowing lights on, where they can be seen by every Tom, Dick and Harry.

Tom, your so rude and kinda dumb alot of the times to be quite honest. radar doesn't compare to actual footage first of all. my idea holds water i believe. you on the other hand couldn't hold your dik properly taking a piss it seems

Bill1/1/2004 6:37:55 PM

Robert why do i let Tago get to me. (smile) makes things interesting i guess. i wanted to ask you about the feasability of what i suggested. are you very familiar with cameras? which would be the best type do you think? how much do they cost? how much sky can they cover? thank you.

Robert L. Sharp1/1/2004 6:54:57 PM

Hi Don,
In the first place, WE don't have radar. The powers that be have the radar. The
government, airports, military, Norad, etc. Do you think they are going to tell us a
freaking thing if something did show up? Of course not. More hot smoke and
cover-ups. There is nothing in our skies that we the ordinary dumb shit citizen
should know about, so Bill was only suggesting a sensible compromise. I have
an idea. Why don't Bill and I and other interested parties set up this little endeavor,
and you can stay inside and watch the Debunkers program on the tube.
Eyes to the sky.......
Robert L. Sharp

Don Tago1/1/2004 7:06:17 PM

Ok, i will take you seriously. But now lets do the math.

The land area of earth in square miles is 59,187,530 sq.mi.

So if you put one video camera every 10 square miles (like you said), you would need 5,918,753 cameras to cover the entire land surface of earth, not even taking oceans into account.

Lets say each camera unit consists of an inexpensive camcorder (150$US) with a tripod (25$US) and a solar power unit that charges the battery during the day (250$US) and a new tape each day to record more footage (25$US). So thats 500 dollars per camera unit. For every single unit in the world, that would total up to about 2.95 billion dollars. Gosh, that money would do a lot if put towards education!

Each day, someone would then have to go out and watch each 24 hour reel of footage to look for space ships. Everyday, all the cameras would produce about 142 million hours of footage. That is 845,536 weeks or a little over 16,000 years of footage each nite.

To have it so you had the tapes from each day watched before the tapes from the upcomming day were ready to watch, you would need nearly 12 million people to watch the tapes in shifts, so while half would watch 12 hours of the tape from one day, and then sleep for 12 hours, while the next shift slept while the others team watched.

This all seems pretty realistic and an appropriate use of resources!
Lets go for it.

Robert L. Sharp1/1/2004 7:14:53 PM

Don:
I believe Bill was talking only of the USA. Would you please do the math for this?
Don, I personally think you are a very bright, knowledgeable, articulate person,
but would you please lighten up, chill out and kick back a little? Simple ideas can
result in great outcomes sometimes. Maybe we can start with just one county in
one state, and not have to hire 12 zillion people to work this out.
Just me again,
Robert L. Sharp

Don Tago1/1/2004 7:16:22 PM

If you wanted to similarly do this for JUST the US instead of the world it would go like this:

The USA is 3,537,441 sq, mi. You would then need a total number of only 353,744 cameras to spread every 10sq mi.

Using the amount of 500$US from above, it would only cost 176.8 million dollars for all the camera units.

Additionally, it would only produce 8.49 million hours of footage, in other words only about 969 years of footage each nite, and you would only need 7 million people do watch all the footage everyday.

So thats a little bit more realistic than doing the whole world!

Robert L. Sharp1/1/2004 7:22:32 PM

Don,
This simplifies it to some extent. What the hell, we spend $4 or $5 BILLION every
month in the great country of Iraq, so this sounds like coffee money to me. For
48 to 60 billion a year spent on Iraq, we could equip every man, woman and child
with a great camera setup. And, it would put a lot of people to work manufacturing
all of this equipment. WOW!!!
Robert

Bill1/1/2004 7:23:35 PM

Don, relax dude.

as i said earlier you could just take the incoming sightings figure out which camera would apply and look at that footage. you don't have to look at all the footage. get the idea genius? i personally don't think don is that smart. yeah he can talk a good game but he doesn't relate to people well at all and his thinking is highly suspect. take this for example...i was pretty clear about what i suggested....in the usa we set up cameras and when there's a sighting we go back and check the tapes....he totally messes it up and computes earth footage, etc and suggest we would have to watch all the tape...he may not be playing with a full deck